Serbianna: Poisoned Fruits of Clinton war By Boba Borojevic + Why is Kosovo important even beyond the province itself?
http://www.serbianna.com/columns/borojevic/016.shtml 6th anniversary of NATO attack on Serbia Poisoned Fruits of Clinton war By Boba Borojevic In theory the purpose of the intervention of "the International Community" in the Balkans in general, and the intervention in Kosovo in the spring of 1999 in particular, was to stop bloody interethnic conflicts and to impose the rule of law and tolerance that will be based upon the notion of universal human rights and the entitlement of each and every community to coexist in peace and mutual respect with all others. In practice, however, the results of this intervention have been far worse than the preceding conflict itself. Prior to the bombing of Serbia in 1999 we had a low-level, low-intensity conflict primarily between the members of so called KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) and the Serbian security forces. In the years prior to the bombing, rebel attacks and counter-insurgency operations have resulted in a total of 2,000 deaths on all sides, including members of the Serbian security forces and the KLA, as well as Serbian and Albanian civilians. In the aftermath of the bombing, however, and with tens of thousands of NATO soldiers occupying Kosovo, we've had massive destruction of the priceless Serbian mediaeval heritage in the province, we've had wanton murders of hundreds of Serb and other non-Albanian civilians in the province, and wholescale ethnic cleansing of the Serbs resulting in their near-disappearance from their ancestral lands. As we know, Kosovo was the birthplace of the Serbian state and the cradle of its culture. By all objective standards, the "international community" has failed in its self-appointed task. In the aftermath of the wave of attacks on the remaining Serbs and a new round of destruction of Serbian monuments on March 17 last year - and we cannot call it "interethnic violence" because it was entirely one-way violence by the Albanians against the Serbs - the attackers have been effectively rewarded. Instead of insisting on certain "standards" of the rule of law that need to be fulfilled before we can consider the long terms status of Kosovo, at the UN, the EU and in Washington we are now increasingly witnessing the reversal of these priorities. Some advocates of Kosovo's independence are now saying that status has to come first, and somehow when the status is resolved the standards will come all by themselves. That is a worrying trend, and the Serbian government needs to respond to it in an effective and coherent manner. It effectively means that the increase in the Albanians' lawlessness and further violations of the remaining Serbs' rights are used as an argument to produce the outcome that the instigators of such violence want - an independent Kosovo! It should be clear that unless we have renewed insistence on those "standards" that the international community had set itself back in 1999, there will be neither peace nor justice in the southern Serbian province. Is Serbian diplomacy capable to adequately respond to such pressures? In theory the Serbian authorities should be able to do so. Its diplomacy has ample arguments on it side, but that is not happening. One cause of this failure is the manner in which foreign policy is determined in Belgrade. "Diplomacy" at the level of the state union of Serbia and Montenegro is by necessity the result of an uneasy compromise between Belgrade and Podgorica. The government led by Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica in Belgrade and the leadership headed by Milo Djukanovic in Podgorica do not see eye to eye even on such basic issues as the preservation of the state union itself, let alone on the long-term objective of defending Kosovo. In addition we have to consider the problem of the personality of the current minister of foreign affaires, Vuk Draskovic. He does not act in accordance with any prior agreement with other elements of the state structure in Belgrade. He is conducting diplomacy cahotically and voluntaristically, on a purely ad-hoc basis. His statements, oftenincoherent and bordering on the absurd, reflects his personal views and preferences and the convoluted ways of a troubled mind, rather than a clearly determined policy based upon the notion of national interest. Srdja Trifkovic is the author of The Sword of the Prophet: Islam - History, Theology, Impact on the World Why is Kosovo important even beyond the province itself? There are two answers to your questions. Why is Kosovo so important to the Serbs? Their link to Kosovo is emotional, cultural and spiritual. In addition it has great geo-political significance. If Serbia were to accept amputation of a part of its territory in Kosovo, it is almost certain that further centrifugal pressures will be applied wherever other minorities live in the remnant of Serbia. Very soon this would bring to the agenda the issue of the Raska province (Sandjak) and the Vojvodina province in the north. Once you accept the principle that any ethnic minority can set up the autonomous political and administrative structures within a sovereign state, and then elevate those autonomous structures to secession and independence, you create the blueprint that has alarming consequences for the world at large. Theoretically it could mean that the Hungarian minority in Rumania of two million, or the Russian minority in Moldova or the Baltic republics or in eastern Ukraine etc. could set up autonomous structures and then demand independence on the basis of the Kosovo precedent, and rightfully demand the blessing of "the International Community" for what they are trying to achieve.. The other part of the answer concerns the motives of those forces in the Western world that are now pushing for Kosovo's independence. Some of them, such as Morton Abramowitz or Richard Hollbrooke on the Democratic side and their counterparts in the "neoconservative" establishment want to create an independent Kosovo that would be their tool in a broader geopolitical design - primarily as a means of earning a few points with the Muslim world and justifying the United States in its Middle Eastern policy. They seek to invoke their support for the Muslim parties in Bosnia and Kosovo as an alibi that the USA is not anti Islamic, and as a smokescreen to conceal their actual agenda in the Middle East. Another part of the equation focuses primarily on Brussels, and reflects the desire of the emerging "united Europe" to create new hybrid identities that would be more amenable to the kind of post-modern, post-national manipulation that the EU is hell-bent on pursuing. Such hybrids are ideal candidates for inclusion to the outer ring of the EU, which will encompass second-rate former Soviet republics such as the Ukraine and Moldova soon, and Belarus if and when they pull off in Minsk the trick already tested in Tbilisi and Kiev. Various EU-originating Gauleiters in Bosnia and Kosovo, the assorted Petersens, Ashdowns, Westendorps, Steiners, Kuchners, Haekkerups, et al seek to impose the concept of "multietnicity" that is not based upon co-existence of any real, historic, culturally coherent ethnic and religious groups, but upon an ideologically inspired Potemkin's village totally divorced from the reality on the ground. We do not need to look any further than Bosnia-Herzegovina: the inherent instability of the Dayton edifice is being upheld by foreign force, foreign money, and foreign political pressures. If and when such external props are removed, there is hardly any doubt that Bosnia-Herzegovina will disintegrate into three ethnically based entities. Likewise an independent Kosovo can only exist as either a dysfunctional international protectorate or an ethnically pure Albanian fiefdom in which the KLA - under whatever guise - will run a statelet tainted by criminality that will be a save haven for crime, prostitution, white slavery, drug smuggling, and Islamic extremism. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and therefore no justification for the war. Why is it not the case with Kosovo? The difference is that the war in Iraq was a unilateral action by the U.S. government, led by a Republican president. That did not include the west-European allies except a small number of allied nations such as the United Kingdom. Iraq was regarded by the Europeans as an operation that served a specifically "American" agenda which was effectively kidnapped by the neoconservative wing of the Republican party. European leftists do not mind military interventions per se, for as long as those interventions are conducted in the name of the fictitious multilateral global community, "the International Community," which they themselves represent. Why is the lie about Kosovo war still being perpetrated? It is partly because the media in the West are neither free nor professionally run. They will only follow the scent of those issues with which they feel an ideological affinity. On the other hand Belgrade has been insufficiently proactive in unmasking the lies and insisting that the war was unjust, and that it was conducted under the false pretences. It is unfortunate that many arguments that the Serbian side has at its disposal to set the record straight on the war waged by Clinton and NATO six years ago today, have not been invoked. As long as that omission persist nobody else will do it on the Serbs' behalf. Interviewer: B. Borojevic Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BalkanNews/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
